The Justices of the Supreme Court give their tributes to Souter. I've quoted Ruth Bader Ginsburg's because it's the nicest. To say he's the very best is daringly disrespectful of all the other judges. And all that business about caring and civility and kindness makes you want to be a better person, doesn't it?

36 comments:

Is that why I've heard Obama is looking for someone with "empathy" to fill the seat??

Empathy?

E M P A T H Y ?

This is the Supreme Court of the United States of America.

So tell us President Obama, who is supposed to be a lawyer, are there any SCOTUS cases which stick in your mind as distinctly in need of empathy more than needing to be judged in accordance with the Constitution of the United States?

I don't care how nice Ginsburg finds Souter. I think it's pure crap for justices to play politics with judicial positions. Just one more crap move in a very long list of crap moves by a crap justice. The certain knowledge he would have held the position if a Republican won the executive branch fills my tender mind with sinister thoughts and reinforces the opinion that party loyalty chupa el lagarto grande.

Dale said... Cedarford,George Herbert Walker Bush wanting to strangle his child?Wow, your parents have something in common with the first President Bush.I'm presuming the Elder Bush is a patriot.Just as I am presuming by the fact that you are writing here that your parents were not eugenicists.

While not a fan of his decisions at all, I must credit him for retiring when he does (age 69). Too much of our political classes seem to want to suck from the teat of Power until their last breath (Ted Stevens, Ted Kennedy, Orlon Specter, and Squire Byrd for good examples). I believe he will be truly happy in his retirement.

Question: Was it dishonable for Souter to allow himself to be nominated by GHW Bush, knowing that Bush was doing so under the mistaken impression that he was a conservative?

Should he have alerted Bush to the fact that his judicial philosophy was on the left? Is it plausible that he got through the vetting process without making a conscious effort to conceal his true philosophy?

I smell the Holistic approach to the governing the USA subsidiary of the World. Every separate thing , like individual person' rights and privately owned things, will only be approached as a Totality under the care of our Totally Loving Brother. Assume your new position, all you individuals claiming ownership "rights". Meet the empathetic Rulers of our Holistic Life on Earth: the Atmosphere we breath...the Pandemic Virus cures for us to stay alive... our momentary illusion of having fiat monetary credits... our belief we are actually voting for the Totally Loving Brother who rules us. After all, there will be a CRISIS every day until the Holistic Government comes to power to save us.

NPR had a piece on the other day, citing a speech he gave, in which he described each year's court sessions--everything but his own summer time--as a "lobotomy."

And then there's this. As a regular guy, admittedly not a legal scholar, what are his singular contributions or accomplishments on the Court? Is there any notable doctrine? Any line of thought? A major decision?

Off the top of my head...Ginsberg: use international lawScalia: originalismThomas: another sort of originalism with suspicion of the fedsKennedy: balanceSouter: Kelo and maybe Planned Parenthood v. Casey, and "he was such a nice guy."

I just know the bare facts of Souter's life, but he seems decent, sane, and grounded. I admire the fact that he thinks there are more worthy and rewarding pursuits than pontificating in Washington. Also, as Issob points out, he choose to retire at an age when it is still possible to recognize one's limits. If you think he was too liberal, just wait till you see his replacement.....I know there are many cases where Republicans appoint closet liberals to the Court. Are there any cases where Democrats have appointed conservatives by miscalculation?

I thought Souter was too strange and knee jerk liberal to be a good supreme court judge, and it is remarkable that Bush I made such a mistake on an issue of great importance that was not that hard to get right (see Bush II); however, I have a few things to say about Souter and a question:

1. He had the good sense and grace to retire at 69 rather than hang on like virtually every other person in a powerful Washington job (it does stink a bit that the supposedly apolitical Souter seems to have waited for a liberal democrat to be president);

2. I had one occasion to see him up close at oral argument and he was pretty impressive, both intellectually and in his presentation -- confident strong voice.

3. He was a very significant justice, not because of any inidividual legal thought or contribution, but because he was a reliable vote for liberals and, thus, every 5 to 4 liberal decision during his 20 years is the result of his presence.

4. Is it generally thought that he is gay? I don't care about that in terms of his performance as a justice, but he seems to have a gay profile and, if you read the commnets of Justice Ginsburg, it is the type of comment that women sometimes make regarding a gay male. It also is interesting that the MSM basically has left Souter alone despite his unusual lifestyle, presumably because he was liberal.

To say he's the very best is daringly disrespectful of all the other judges.I don't think that's true. To say he's the best isn't disrespectful, if the context is that one has worked with many great people, but this particular person is the best on some particular scale. Plus, the rest of her quote sounds more like she was saying "Souter, he's the best" in more of a social and friendly way than as some implicit criticism of the other Justices.

Ginsburg's statement reminds me of the insincere letter of recommendation that a faculty adviser writes on behalf of his worst student. Anyone reading it immediately puts it on the bottom of the pile where it never sees the light of day. It's the Letter of Faint Praise.